Cross-Applying Consumer Strategies to Political Polling: Issue Effect Analysis - Michael D. Lieberman
Issue Effect Analysis (IEA) is a visual, non-multivariate tool designed to identify which political positions, whether skewed too far left or right, are reducing a candidate's support. This method adapts analytical approaches typically used in adjacent research fields to the political landscape. In essence, Issue Effect Analysis is the political counterpart to the widely utilized 'Just About Right' (JAR) analysis, employed in industries such as consumer package goods, food and beverage, cosmetics, household products, pharmaceuticals, pet food, and consumer electronics. IEA provides a more nuanced understanding of how well a candidate’s positions align with voter preferences and can rapidly pinpoint weaknesses in their platform or those of their opponents.
A 'Just About Right' (JAR) analysis for consumer-packaged goods (CPG) is a sensory evaluation technique used to determine whether a product's specific attributes—such as sweetness, saltiness, or texture—fall within consumers' ideal range. The JAR scale typically consists of three categories: 'too little,' 'just about right,' and 'too much.' This method helps companies assess how well their product aligns with consumer preferences for each attribute, enabling them to optimize the product, identify weaknesses, and allow for side-by-side comparisons with multiple products.
Structure of the Survey and IEA Visuals
In political polling, the issue effect approach is used to evaluate voters' perceptions of candidates, policies, or campaign strategies by placing opinions on a spectrum from too extreme to moderate or balanced. Instead of relying on binary choices like "approve" or "disapprove," IEA polling asks respondents to determine whether a candidate's stance or a political position is "too liberal," "too conservative," or "agree with candidate position."
In order to run an Issue Effect Analysis the survey has to be written with certain specific questions. The first is the measurement variable. The analysis must contain an ‘Intend to Vote’ or ‘Favorability’ rating of for our congressional candidate, Julieta Carrillo:
On a scale of 1-to-10, how likely are you to vote for Julieta Carrillo?
Next, the candidate is rated on a number of issues. The following are examples:
· On the following issues, please rate Julieta Carrillo:
o Ensuring everyone has access to affordable health care
o Protecting the little man and middle class
o Protecting the environment
o Immigration amnesty
o Abortion rights
o Native American rights
o Seniors’ issues
o Keep government spending down.
Is Julieta Carrillo:
1. Too conservative
2. Agree with her position
3. Too progressive
Table 1 – Issue Effect Map – Julieta Carrillo
In the visual, a blue issue label indicates that Julieta Carrillo is too progressive on that particular issue, while a red label suggests that she is too conservative. The interpretation of an issue's position on the graph in the Issue Effect Analysis visual is outlined in detail in Table 2 (below).
Table 2 – Interpretation of the IAE Visual
Insights from the IEA Analysis
The ability to interpret the IEA visual is crucial. Equally important is the next step: extracting the key insights relevant to the Carillo campaign, which are presented below.
High Impact Issues
Health Care: About 17% of respondents feel that Julieta Carrillo’s stance is too progressive, leading to approximately a 2-point decrease in support from these voters compared to those who agree with her on this issue.
Protecting the Little Man and Middle Class: Around 17% of respondents believe the candidate’s position is too conservative. These voters are more than 2 points less likely to support her compared to those who align with her views.
Abortion Rights: Roughly 18% of respondents find Julieta Carrillo’s position too progressive, resulting in a 1.5-point drop in support.
Immigration Amnesty: Approximately 14% of respondents feel the candidate’s stance is too conservative, leading to a 1.7-point decrease in their likelihood to vote for her compared to those who agree with her position.
Secondary Impact Issues
Protecting the Environment: Although Julieta Carrillo loses 1.5 points in support from voters who believe she is too progressive on this issue, only around 5% of respondents share this view.
Senior Issues: While the candidate loses 1.2 points among voters who feel she is too conservative on senior issues, this group represents just 4% of the respondents.
Low Impact Issues
These issues have too few agreeing respondents and too little impact for the Carrillo campaign to consider them 'swing' issues.
In conclusion, cross-applying consumer strategies to political polling provides a powerful framework for understanding voter behavior and preferences. By using methods like segmentation and preference analysis, campaigns can better identify key issues, optimize their messaging, and assess how various political positions resonate with different voter groups. Techniques such as the "Just About Right" (JAR) analysis, widely used in consumer industries, can be adapted to the political arena to evaluate where a candidate’s stance may be too extreme or too moderate, offering a nuanced view of voter sentiment.
This approach not only refines how campaigns target and persuade voters but also highlights potential weaknesses in a candidate’s platform. Much like companies use consumer data to improve products and align with market needs, political campaigns can utilize these strategies to adapt and fine-tune their policies and messaging. Ultimately, integrating consumer strategies into political polling allows for more precise and actionable insights, improving a campaign’s ability to connect with voters and win their support.